Nikon 50mm f1.8 Made In China vs Made In Japan


edmo0001

New Member
Apr 13, 2011
367
0
0
#1
Hi,

If given a choice of the above lenses, with around the same pricing, which one would you choose? Have anybody ever tried comparing both lenses? What's the main differences (other than the distance information) between the two lenses (maybe the coating.. etc)?

Thanks! :)
 

116520

New Member
Oct 18, 2009
482
0
0
#2
One is made by Chinese, the other is made by Japanese.... cheers!
 

xFamous

New Member
Oct 2, 2009
44
0
0
26
#4
They both take great pictures in the right hands.
 

#5
I want to find out if there's a difference too.. problem is.. the japan lenses dun have the D chip... I ve got bothe the MIJ 85 1.8, and the Thailand 85 1.8D so will be putting them side by side and comparing
 

edmo0001

New Member
Apr 13, 2011
367
0
0
#6
I want to find out if there's a difference too.. problem is.. the japan lenses dun have the D chip... I ve got bothe the MIJ 85 1.8, and the Thailand 85 1.8D so will be putting them side by side and comparing
yea.. just let us know here what are the significant differences after u have tested. At least the knowledge about the image character of the older lens compared to the newer lens is useful. :)
 

dardar

New Member
Oct 6, 2010
168
0
0
#7
btw u can pay to get it reprint to made in japan if the made in china if make in china bother u so much
 

#11
Anw, having taken a look at the 2 lenses, they have different coatings, which is probably due to advances in coating(or cost cutting). the MIJ is ≈450g, while the MIT is ≈390g both without lens caps or filters.

Turning the focus ring form infinity to CFD makes the slotted screw drive turn ≈5.6 rounds on the MIJ, but only ≈4.6rounds on the MIT. this means(in theory) that the MIJ has a higher degree of accuracy while the MIT has a faster speed.. the MIT does indeed go from ∞-closest-∞ faster by about 1/5second. how much this affects the accuracy im not exactly sure and both lenses seem to acquire subjects just as fast.. have yet to look into accuracy or tracking. turning the focus ring in MF, the MIJ is quieter than the MIT, more rattling in the MIT even though its only purchased this year. however the sound difference is not noticeable in AF.

the back 'hood', which isolates the optics from the mechanical parts within the lens is longer in the MIT and at no point can you see the mechanics. the MIJ one is shorter and when the focus is at closest distance, the aperture mechanism can be seen inside. this in theory, means that the MIJ version is more susceptible to flare at close focus distances which would reduce contrast. i have not tried testing them in real world situations and this is just a possible effect. if it matters, the MIJ one is plastic while the MIT one is metal.

From what i've heard and somewhat believe, the MIJ lenses are made to tighter tolerances and have better optics(i have no way to actually test this, its just what i ve heard..) however, they lack the D chip which makes you have to choose D chip, or 'better build quality'. the D chip influences 3D matrix metering and flash metering(TTL-BL)..

what i would like to know is if the D chip also influences the accuracy of AF tacking... I have no evidence that it does, but no concrete quote that it does not.. my guess is that it does not so if you are careful with your metering and do not play with flash too much, the D chip makes little difference. I use manual lenses all the time and they dun allow 3D matrix metering anyway so little loss to me.

*this part is purely speculation*
it is possible that the 'big' difference in weight comes from the helicoid assembly used to move the rear focusing group. i know that this assembly is plastic in the 50 1.8D, and it is possible that the MIJ version uses a metal helicoid while the MIT uses a plastic helicoid. if thats the case then the MIJ versions are indeed built to a higher quality and will last longer than the MIT counterparts. but this shouldn't be too much of an issue and we don't see the MIT lenses just falling apart..

what we should be concerned with is the calibration of the lens groups within the lens which might be done to a higher tolerance int he MIJ that MIT which would thus lead to higher image quality. i ll be testing them side by side soon just for fun.
 

Last edited:

Michael

New Member
Apr 5, 2005
829
0
0
47
Thailand
www.pbase.com
#12
Your comparison of the old and new 85mm has nothing to with where it is made. You are comparing an old and a new generation lens, that's all.
 

Nov 10, 2010
174
0
16
#13
The 50mm f/1.8 D has such a simple construction and is way too cheap that making it anywhere else other than china doesnt really make sense for a company.
the formula for a 50 f/1.8 has been the same for the longest time.

something as complicated as a 70-200 f/2.8, yeah please make that in Japan.
 

#14
Your comparison of the old and new 85mm has nothing to with where it is made. You are comparing an old and a new generation lens, that's all.
as is the case with the 50 1.8 MIJ and MIC. all the MIJ 50 1.8s are non D and all the 50 1.8Ds are MIC.. there is no way a direct comparison can be made and this is the closest you get to one. for all we know, some of the changes were implemented due to the inability of the thailand/china plant to manufacture/process different materials..
 

Last edited:

madnug

New Member
Apr 25, 2011
85
0
0
#16
as is the case with the 50 1.8 MIJ and MIC. All AF-D lenses are MIC, all non-D lenses are MIJ.
Not right ... some cheaper non-D lens (e.g. AF-S G-lens) are also MIC.
 

madnug

New Member
Apr 25, 2011
85
0
0
#18
@ Ben Ang

Understood what you meant ... the 50mm 1.8 non-D are usually MIJ
But I guess Nikon already moving part of their production to China.

An example here, a 50mm F1.8G which is MIC.

Image from www.kenrockwell.com
 

Last edited:

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,645
63
48
lil red dot
#19
Ben Ang said:
Anw, having taken a look at the 2 lenses, they have different coatings, which is probably due to advances in coating(or cost cutting). the MIJ is ≈450g, while the MIT is ≈390g both without lens caps or filters.

Turning the focus ring form infinity to CFD makes the slotted screw drive turn ≈5.6 rounds on the MIJ, but only ≈4.6rounds on the MIT. this means(in theory) that the MIJ has a higher degree of accuracy while the MIT has a faster speed.. the MIT does indeed go from ∞-closest-∞ faster by about 1/5second. how much this affects the accuracy im not exactly sure and both lenses seem to acquire subjects just as fast.. have yet to look into accuracy or tracking. turning the focus ring in MF, the MIJ is quieter than the MIT, more rattling in the MIT even though its only purchased this year. however the sound difference is not noticeable in AF.

the back 'hood', which isolates the optics from the mechanical parts within the lens is longer in the MIT and at no point can you see the mechanics. the MIJ one is shorter and when the focus is at closest distance, the aperture mechanism can be seen inside. this in theory, means that the MIJ version is more susceptible to flare at close focus distances which would reduce contrast. i have not tried testing them in real world situations and this is just a possible effect. if it matters, the MIJ one is plastic while the MIT one is metal.

From what i've heard and somewhat believe, the MIJ lenses are made to tighter tolerances and have better optics(i have no way to actually test this, its just what i ve heard..) however, they lack the D chip which makes you have to choose D chip, or 'better build quality'. the D chip influences 3D matrix metering and flash metering(TTL-BL)..

what i would like to know is if the D chip also influences the accuracy of AF tacking... I have no evidence that it does, but no concrete quote that it does not.. my guess is that it does not so if you are careful with your metering and do not play with flash too much, the D chip makes little difference. I use manual lenses all the time and they dun allow 3D matrix metering anyway so little loss to me.

*this part is purely speculation*
it is possible that the 'big' difference in weight comes from the helicoid assembly used to move the rear focusing group. i know that this assembly is plastic in the 50 1.8D, and it is possible that the MIJ version uses a metal helicoid while the MIT uses a plastic helicoid. if thats the case then the MIJ versions are indeed built to a higher quality and will last longer than the MIT counterparts. but this shouldn't be too much of an issue and we don't see the MIT lenses just falling apart..

what we should be concerned with is the calibration of the lens groups within the lens which might be done to a higher tolerance int he MIJ that MIT which would thus lead to higher image quality. i ll be testing them side by side soon just for fun.
Just a note bro that on most higher models, you still get color matrix metering with manual lenses. Just not 3d
 

Top Bottom